Timeline for Besides retarded gravitation, anything else to worry about when calculating MU69's orbit from scratch?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Dec 28, 2018 at 9:22 | history | suggested | Alex Hajnal |
added additional tag
|
|
| Dec 28, 2018 at 8:46 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Dec 28, 2018 at 9:22 | |||||
| May 12, 2017 at 12:40 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSpaceExp/status/863010981273796609 | ||
| May 12, 2017 at 3:58 | vote | accept | uhoh | ||
| May 12, 2017 at 3:26 | comment | added | uhoh | @BenCrowell the calculation involves observation of MU69 at 44AU from the HST which is 1 AU from the Sun. So I'm asking about the difference between 1 AU location and the 44 AU location. | |
| May 11, 2017 at 19:49 | comment | added | user687 | This object's orbit has a semimajor axis of 44 AU. Stated at the crudest level, we need general relativity rather than newtonian gravity when gravitational fields are strong. Therefore the outer solar system is the worst possible place to look if you're hoping to get fun, relativistic effects that need to be taken into account. This is why Mercury's orbit was a classic test of GR, and is also why the Shapiro time delay was measured for sun-grazing rays: adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/… | |
| May 11, 2017 at 17:34 | comment | added | uhoh | @barrycarter Thank you for those - I'll definitely take a look! I want to start by doing it in the lowest-tech way first, so that I can better appreciate more advanced algorithms in the future, but it's great to know they exist. I only let myself start using the scipy ODE methods after I wrote and tested an RK45 with automatic variable step size script myself first. It's just my way of learning how stuff works. | |
| May 11, 2017 at 17:19 | comment | added | user7073 | You might want to look over naif.jpl.nasa.gov/pub/naif/toolkit_docs/C/index.html in particular how they note that computing light travel time doesn't make much of a difference. Also, you might want to use a numerical DFQ solver instead of the iteration you propose. I've done similar work for planets, nearly replicating Horizons' answers. Let me know if you want more details. | |
| May 11, 2017 at 15:58 | answer | added | David Hammen | timeline score: 15 | |
| May 11, 2017 at 9:59 | history | edited | uhoh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 166 characters in body
|
| May 11, 2017 at 9:22 | history | asked | uhoh | CC BY-SA 3.0 |